Richard Kettlewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >I think the absence of a revision number is a good indicator of Debian > specific packages anyway.
But is that what it indicates? Might it not also indicate that the package developer uses debian linux as his base, and he just chose not to assign a debian revision number to his package, even though it might also be picked up by and used on non-debian systems? ( IMHO, it'd be better for that package maintainer to have a base version number without a debian package revision number for the non-debian-specific package sources; and to add a debian revision number when he made the package debian-specific by adding debian.rules and the other debian packaging overhead files, and making whatever debian-specific changes the package might require. That'd also provide a mechanism for making debian-specific changes in the package without twiddling the version number of the basic package. ) If it might also indicate that, is it a _good_ indicator of a Debian specific package? Perhaps a convention that a revision number of 0 indicates a debian-specific package and revision numbers >0 [.. oops, considering the dpkg package versioning thread, I should probably say "(>>0)" ;-) ..] indicate a source package debianized from more general sources.
